Lexicon of Arguments

 Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
I 71
Essentialism/today/VsQuine: most modal logicians today accept essentialism. QuineVsEssentialism: incorrect: it is incorrect to say that one description is better than the other, because it better characterizes essential properties of an object.
>Essential property, >Possible worlds, >Modal logic.
I 72
Essence/essentialism/essential property/LeibnizVsQuine/Stalnaker: thesis: every property of every individual constitutes its essence and only the existence of the thing as a whole is contingent.
>Leibniz.
I 74
Anti-Essentialism/quantified modal logic/Stalnaker/conclusion: in order to connect the two, we need real semantic conditions for atomic predicates.
Reason:
(Ex)N(Fx) > (x)N(Fx) is a theorem, but not its substitution instance
(Ex)N(Rxy) > (x)N(Rxy). If something necessarily is father of x, then everything is necessarily father of x. Of course, only intrinsic predicates are in question, but this is assumed and not explained.
>Intrinsicness.
I 85
Essentialism/Stalnaker: questions about essentialism are questions about how far it is appropriate and possible to abstract.
>Abstraction.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.